1. General description of the extent to which and how the social impact of policy proposals is assessed in your country

Transcription

1 Norway 1. General description of the extent to which and how the social impact of policy proposals is assessed in your country To what extent is the social impact of policy proposals in your country assessed? Is this done routinely (formalised) as part of the policy process (e.g. in the context of an integrated or specific ex ante impact assessment system) or more ad hoc? Is the assessment of social impacts mandatory or is it done on a voluntary basis? Which policy proposals are being assessed (please also consider policy proposals which would not normally be characterised as social policy )? In Norway some types of Social Impact Assessments (SIAs) are foreseen as part of a consequence assessment. In 2005 the then Ministry of Government and Administration published an updated version of the Instructions concerning consequence assessment, submissions and review procedures in connection with official studies, regulations, proportions and reports to the Storting (Norwegian Parliament), laid down by Royal Degree of 24 th June 2005 (further on called Instructions). The Instructions made it mandatory to study the financial, administrative and other significant consequences. They contain a description of the process for assessing consequences and general information on the requirements and on the content. The different ministries are responsible for working with the Instructions. For example, in 2007 the then Ministry of Labour and Inclusion developed a guideline for working with the Instructions assessing the impact on equality for persons with an immigrant background, the Sami people and national minorities (available in Norwegian). Several public departments offer support for working with the Instructions: 1) The Norwegian Ministry of Government Administration, Reform and Church Affairs has developed a Guideline for working with the Instructions (Utredningsinstruksen med veileder i utredningsarbeid, Oslo 2007) and is organising regular meetings for employees, who are working with the Instructions at the different Ministries. The Guideline contains mainly information on the development process for public documents (utredningsprosessen) and refers to area-specific guidelines published by other ministries, for example the Guideline for socio-economic analyses and the Guideline for the implementation of evaluations, which both are published by the Norwegian Ministry of Finance. 2) The Agency for Public Management and e-government (difi), which belongs to the Norwegian Ministry of Government Administration, Reform and Church Affairs, provides an online project guideline (in Norwegian: Prosjektveiviseren) including information on working with the Instructions. The objective of the Prosjektveiviseren is to give the Norwegian public sector guidance in carrying out ICT projects. Its aim is to strengthen the leadership, planning and quality of ICT projects in the Norwegian public sector. Furthermore it aims to aid an increase in the methodical and organizational coordination both horizontally and vertically in the Norwegian public sector. ( viewed 26 November 2011). 1

2 3) The Norwegian Government Agency for Financial Management (DFØ), established by the Ministry of Finance, aims to strengthen financial management within public sector activities and improve resource efficiency within the area. This will be achieved by coordination of competence and resources within public financial management, enabling us to exploit economies of scale and competence. The goal is higher quality and lower total cost for the public sector within financial management. ( DFO/Om-DFO/Norwegian-Government-Agency-for-Financial-Management/, viewed 26 November 2011) The DFØ has for example established an online database, which contains support for working with socio-economic analyses as part of the consequence assessments. Additionally the DFØ is responsible for the evaluation portal, which contains all reports of evaluations implemented for Norwegian ministries and other public organisations ( What is understood by social impact(s)? Is it defined in any official guidance? The Instructions contain no definition on Social Impact Assessment, but does mention that in addition to financial and administrative consequences other significant consequences shall be assessed. These include: - Consequences for the health of the population. - Consequences for gender equality, partly against the background of gender equality objectives. - The relationship to human rights. Those carrying out the assessment shall evaluate and, when relevant, provide an account of whether human rights conventions set out requirements for the authorities in the area in question. To what extent is social impact assessment a closed or an open process? (transparency, involvement of stakeholders through public consultation, publication of results). The Instructions are a good practice example for transparency and public participation in the context of the Open Government Partnership, a multilateral initiative that aims to secure concrete commitments from governments to promote transparency, empower citizens, fight corruption, and harness new technologies to strengthen governance (information paper Open Government Partnership and country paper Government Norway: Transparency and Inclusive, Oslo, 19 September 2011, Stakeholder involvement is one of the key concepts in the Open Government Partnership and in the Instructions. Several good practise examples for stakeholder involvement in the development of social and labour market programmes are available. One example: Stakeholders have been continuously involved in the development, implementation and evaluation of the Inclusive Working Life Programme, which aims at reducing sick leave, increasing employment of people with reduced functional abilities and preventing early retirement. 2

3 How do you evaluate the impact of SIAs? Is there any evidence that they have improved (or even affected) the policymaking process? The Agency for Public Management and e-government is currently producing a report describing the work and experience with the Instructions. This report will be available in General description of the capacity for social impact assessment In developing capacity for social impact assessment, one can choose, broadly, between developing capacity within public administration (institutional embedding) or outsourcing to research centres and academic institutions. Please briefly describe the options that have been chosen in your country and the underlying rationale. Where social impact assessments are outsourced, briefly discuss the relationship between the external research centres (or other bodies carrying out the SIA) and the commissioning government departments. Is there a tension between academic freedom and political responsibility? To what extent is there a long term strategy aimed at developing expertise/ human resources, methods, tools and databases? The Ministry participating in this Peer Review, the Norwegian Ministry of Labour, has since 2008 not implemented or commissioned any SIAs. But the Ministry has a strategy for strengthening the knowledge and expertise, methods, tools and databases to improve ex ante and ex post evaluations of policies. Databases are established containing information on the whole population regarding the different kinds of benefits, labour participation, sickness and other things are established, which means that it will be possible to track the effects of different policies on people and also to provide inputs for cost-benefit analyses. For example, a cost-benefit-analysis was done before the Qualification Programme was implemented in 2007 (see Peer Review seminar in October 2009, Developing well-targeted tools for the active inclusion of vulnerable people). All laws, measurements and other regulations made by the government shall in principle be evaluated, ex ante and ex post. Of special interest is creating good indicators for following the development of the welfare state. This can give more knowledge on how to monitor interactions between social, economic, employment and environmental policies. The Norwegian Ministry of Labour has engaged a research centre to conduct randomized control trials of labour market measures. The policies need to be based more on reliable evidence. 3

4 3. Strengths and weaknesses of the capacity for social impact assessment Please describe briefly the strengths and weaknesses of the capacity for social impact assessment in your country. Consider separately a) human resources (experts - researchers), b) methods and tools and c) data sources. Documentation on the work with the Instructions will be available in 2012 (see answer to question 1). Norway is not participating in the Open Method of Coordination, but appreciates the participation in the Peer Review seminar, which will lead to further discussions on the Instructions and SIAs in Norway. 4. Please, provide examples to illustrate the use of methodologies, tools and data sources in your country that could be presented / examined during the Peer Review Could you provide us with a short description of some (approx. 3/5) ex ante social impact assessment cases that can illustrate the use of tools, methodologies and data sources? Some Official Norwegian Reports contain consequence assessments, mainly on economic and administrative consequences. Examples which contain information on other significant consequences, e.g. consequences for the welfare state, are the reports Structure for equality (Norwegian Ministry of Children, Equality and Social Inclusion, NOU 2011:18 Struktur for likestilling) and Welfare and migration (Norwegian Ministry of Children, Equality and Social Inclusion, NOU 2011:7 Velferd og migrasjon). The assessments are based on available data and ex post evaluations. Nearly all NOUs and official documents are only available in Norwegian ( An exception is the White Paper Work, Welfare and Inclusion (Norwegian Ministry of Labour and Inclusion, St.meld. nr. 9, : Arbeid, velferd og inkludering), of which an English summary was published in 2007 and for which a programme was made by COWI, a Danish consultant company, to calculate consequences of socio-economic benefits. The English summary contains the following descriptions of possible consequences and impacts for individuals, the society, public finances and public administration: Consequences Through the reforms outlined in this White Paper, it is the Government s ambition to lay the foundation for including a lot more of the persons who currently fall outside the workforce in gainful employment. The benefit for both the individual person and for the society at large will depend on how many more persons can be employed. Even modest improvements may yield significant positive results. The Government s ambition that these reforms, together with the organisational reform of the employment and welfare administration, should lead to substantial positive results for individuals and for the society at large. Such an outcome will contribute towards realising the Government's strategy of help towards self-help, to develop a more inclusive society, to foster continued growth in the standard of living and to ensure sustainable social security for all inhabitants and sustainable public finances at the same time. 4

5 The Government's proposal to develop more labour market oriented education and training in a more practical direction, together with expanded access for the employment and welfare administration to purchase external clarification and follow-up measures, will help realising the objective of Government s ( Soria Moria ) Declaration, to provide a follow-up guarantee for young job-seekers aged. These measures, together with others such as use of long-term wage subsidies, will also help meet the needs of the long-term unemployed, in line with the objectives in the Government s Declaration. The overall effect of the measures proposed in this Report is difficult to estimate.changes are proposed which encompass a number of policy instruments at the same time, and the consequences in the form of results and achievement of objectives will take some time. Therefore, there is substantial uncertainty related to the overall effects. The Ministry of Labour and Social Inclusion will assign priority to following up the results and analyses of measures that follow from this White Paper and the Parliament s discussions on it. Impact on individuals The main strategies and measures in this Report are all aimed at ensuring that a lot more persons on the fringe of the labour market can find employment, return to work and/or obtain a better foothold in working life. The overall period during which an individual may receive national insurance benefits, waiting periods, etc. may be significantly shorter. Sample calculations illustrates that one person staying five more years in gainful employment can contribute to increasing lifetime earnings for an individual by approximately one half million NOK, calculated at present value. Other significant societal and individual gains are the personal and welfare-related added values associated with being part of a work fellowship and supporting oneself through work. For those who are covered by the national insurance's temporary benefit schemes, the benefit system will be simpler and more predictable; however, key factors such as main eligibility conditions and compensation levels will not be changed. There will be certain effects linked to the reorganisation of the child supplements, but since the premise is that the changes will not apply to those who already have a resolution regarding benefits, no current recipients of such benefits will be directly affected by these changes. The qualification program with associated qualification benefit provides new opportunities for persons who are not currently covered by the NIS benefits nor clearly defined follow-up regimes. Preliminary experience gained from implementation of the introduction program for immigrants is positive. Although the target group for the qualification program is quite different, there is reason to believe that many persons in this situation can be included in working life as a consequence of the program. Impact on society It is very difficult to predict how many additional persons will be able to get and keep employment, and for how many additional years, as a result of the Government's proposals. The percentage of the working age population in Norway that falls outside working life due to sickness, rehabilitation and disability is high compared with other countries. This may be an indication of the potential. Sample calculations illustrate that e.g additional persons working for five years can yield an estimated socio-economic benefit of approximately NOK 3 billion. If the number of persons on disability pensions is reduced by 10 percent, long-term estimates indicate that this would be equivalent to NOK 19 billion, or about 3 percent of the total expenses in the total state budget. Such sample calculations on the share of the working age population on disability pension shows that even relatively moderate ambitions as regards increased participation in the labour force can yield great benefits for the Norwegian society. Success depends not only on how individuals are met and followed up, but also on general development in the labour markets and in the Norwegian economy as a whole. In the present situation where the demand for labour is high, the 5

6 chances of including new groups in working life are greater than in a situation where the economy is characterised by higher unemployment. Impact on public finances In the short term, an uncertain estimate places the overall "investment expenses" at about NOK 1,300 million per year as a consequence of the measures discussed in this White paper. Most of these expenses are related to the proposed new qualification program and the qualification benefit. Over the longer term, the proposed measures are expected to result in a net savings in the form of more persons employed and fewer receiving public maintenance benefits. The impact on the public finances will largely reflect the expected macroeconomic effects on higher labour market inclusion and participation among target groups of persons on the fringe of the labour market (OECD 2006: Sickness, Disability and Work: Breaking the Barriers. Norway, Poland and Switzerland ). Impact on public administration The strategies and measures raised in this Report are expected to contribute to simplification and more efficient use of resources in the public employment and welfare administration. This will also benefit the users of their services, which in fact is more or less the whole population during our life-span. At the same time, the reform will place new demands on how the local work is carried out. The White paper also points to the need for new and improved knowledge within a number of areas. A systematic evaluation of the reform is planned, along with follow up of the need for improved expertise in the labour and welfare organisation and the need for increased knowledge. 5. Key issues for discussion Please indicate which key issues (related to methodology, tools and data sources for ex ante social impact assessment) you consider most useful to discuss during the Peer Review. The Norwegian Ministry of Labour considers the participation in the Peer Review seminar as very useful for encouraging discussions on SIAs in Norway; therefore the participants from Norway are very interested in discussing best practice examples, e.g. from Finland, which were described in both studies commissioned by the DG Employment, Social Affairs and Equal Opportunities (VC/2008/0303 and VT/2008/046). Two key questions: What has been achieved through the implementation of SIAs? Have SIAs led to changes in proposed policies and programmes? 6